Open Letter to Prime Minister Vajpayee

Ref Layman #: 436

[I do know that Vajpayee and others were in the Jan Sangh which during the Jay Prakash Narayan movement during Emergency merged with the Janata Party. But the fact remains that BJP won only two seats in their first election in 1984 (sympathy for Indira Gandhi or not) and went up to their current tally of 170 plus, part of it due to the Ayodhya issue.]

There are lies, damned lies, and then there are statistics.

Figures don`t lie; but liars can figure.

Fact is Congress was on the way down since 1965. Indira Gandhi pulled off one stunt after another to stay in power: nationalizing banks; abolishing the privy purses; splitting the Congress Party; imposing the Emergency, etc. The final (involuntary) act of course was getting killed by her Sikh bodyguards with the result her son, with no political experience, was elected with a thumping majority. The Bofors scandal tarnished the Mr. Clean image of Rajiv Gandhi and Congress has continued its decline. To paint the BJP`s victory as due to the demolition of Babri Masjid is insulting to the voters of India who, though they might be illiterate, are educated in a sense that you aren`t.

[And Harimau, you can back off Farzana too.]

No, I will not. I have no reason to apologize for being a Hindu. I have no intention of knuckling down to any strident minority figures either because they are strident or because they belong to a minority group; nor do I intend to allow spineless hand-wringing Hindu apologists like you, Sadhana, MaheshG, headshrinker, etc., to get away with BS.

Farzana is a big girl. She can answer criticism directed at her.

Urstruly wrote about Farzana:

``But no matter how hard they try; no matter what name the call, a rose will always be a rose.``

You mean a weed will always be a weed even if painted pink.

re. Assad_K #433:

``You could say that the history of Muhammad (PBUH) has been sanitized by his followers... but if he was the kind of man as has been claimed, would he be remembered by history as he is? Could you rewrite Attila or Chengiz Khan, or Vlad, as good guys for the world?``

Not totally inconceivable, really. But citing extremes is uncalled for. For a more conceivable possibilility of the above happening, consider how history might have shown Julius Caeser had he indeed succeded as Emperor -- even if he never brought forth God`s Final Word to mankind, or come to be regarded as the Perfect Human, the very mention of whose name one shudders to make without appending a benediction.

rgds,

PM

Re: PM

``If the quoting of a verses causes you harm, you really have to ask yourself who/what is causing that harm.``

Hamidm has done the same on another board and a bunch of them are about to declare him a kafir and toss him over the border.

By the way, you`d better cool it...soon the Islamists will announce yet another conspiracy theory about Hindus and Christians (your erstwhile religion) ganging up on Islam...the Hindu-Jewish conspiracy is sufficient.

Patrick

Hm, having just read Ali1`s post 421, that doesn`t exactly help MY case, does it? Sigh...

On introspection, I usually don`t reply to people who reveal their strong biases the second they appear. You I`m engaging because I used to agree with almsot everything you wrote, until Shiraz appeared.

And, in some ways, you are correct - it probably IS because you are Christian. Though not (consciously) in the sense that you meant. I had a Christian friend in college who was a coupla years junior to me, but conversation never got heavy enough to go into the general state of Christians in Pakistan. So basically my interaction with Pakistani Christians (as with Pakistani Hindus) has been minimal. And for one to demonstrate such a strong support for one whom I see as expressly anti-Islam (let alone anti-Pakistani) (ref especially his posts 365 and 366, and RSax re 378) I find troubling for all that implies about Pakistan and how its treated its minorities. Intellectual appreciation for something is different from running into it. I think you gave an email addy once, if you can repeat it I may email you there with a somewhat clearer explanation of what I mean (since I think i`m being a bit fuzzy here...).

Cheers, AK

Veeresh re:434

Indeed we do. The PPC and the IPC are both the same, being continued on from the British Colonial Penal Code (or whatever it was). Though the PPC has propbably become new and improved with a few Islamic provisos!

PM re:438

Of course, everything I write is based on MY perceptions of what people mean by what they write.

{because I merely suggest that Muhammed was no Buddha, and that, like the best of men, could have had moments of weakness, I am perceived to be toeing the Islam-and-its-Prophet-are-Evil line?}

No, but that is exactly what I see Harimau as doing. And you support him, in the ¡¥Well, he¡¦s quoted lots of sources, so he must be right¡¦ way. These ¡¥moments of weakness¡¦ would include pedophilia. Our perceptions are obviously different.. if I post a website to support my arguments, and speak up for the arguments or sentiments expressed by someone, then I believe and supprt what that person is saying. You may differ. I may just not be understanding you. Que sera sera.

I honestly don¡¦t remember SameerJB expressing similar sentiments towards Muhammad (PBUH) and Islam (though some of the actions of Muslims have, and should be, condemned). Hamidm¡¦s posts, in their exaggerations, cynicisms and general esaggerated attack upon EVERYTHING are amusing without seeming to stem from hatred. I don¡¦t see that here. I see hatred (emphasise again, I). If you think I¡¦m picking on you because of your Christian background (whether you are practicing or not), then feel free to remain under that illusion. I get offended when certain lines are crossed. Can I define those lines? Not really. I just know that people like Shiraz and Harimau cross them, in my mind.

{by attacking beliefs, you are not necessarily passing moral judgement on those who subscribe to them. You might still see the other person as essentially the same as yourself, save for the `errant` belief.}

Differing perception, again. I would see an attack upon ¡¥belief¡¦ as being challenging, say, a Muslims belief that he is inherently superior to a non-Muslim, merely by virtue of being a Muslim, or saying that its ok to kill ¡¥kafirs¡¦ be they man, woman, child, old or infirm, just because they¡¦re kafirs. However, calling the Prophet(PBUH) a pedophile/deluded/murderous (and, by extension, denying any sort of credibility to Islam) doesn¡¦t strike me as attacking ¡¥beliefs¡¦.

Objectivity and revisionism is important for history. To believe in God, however, we have no evidence. We have only the leap of faith. That same leap extends to His messengers, whom we must believe to be better men than ¡¥average¡¦. Moments of weakness are acceptable. The Prophet (PBUH) turning away from Abu Sufyan (one of his bitterest enemies) even after the latter had converted to Islam ¡V ok, thats acceptable to me as a moment of weakness. Rapist and murderer? That goes way beyond a ¡¥moment of weakness¡¦ in my eyes ¡V thats simply contemptible. And if God chooses such a man as His Messenger.. well, then, that pretty much screws it ALL up, doesn¡¦t it?

So consider me un-analytical, simple minded, brainwashed, anti-non-Muslim or whatever you choose.It`s unlikely we`re going to see eye-to-eye on this..

(.... this is for you as well as for bilal, arun and others who have wondered why readers/visitors are silent on various issues...I am speaking for myself here...my silence on certain issues betrays a revulsion resulting in a reluctance to join the plethora of pissing matches...such encounters are counter-productive...but only naiveté and gross ignorance would let one interpret such silences as an acquiescence of sorts for their own agenda...hidden or obvious...)


SHE HAS BALLS, HARIMOU YOU DON’T


Harimou:

...I was almost beginning to enjoy your diatribes... not any more...with the leeway provided by the rope of freedom of expression you have hung yourself..... too bad...

....on at least three occasions you threw blanket challenges to anyone who can find a flaw in your reasoning..

...here is why you have lost all credibility in my eyes... and why from now on I will simply pass over your posts... you are but another clone of VB, BT, LA, with your own hateful agenda...just as bad as our own infamous hate mongerers...
______________________________________________



1: harimau #416

[...I really would like people to point out the logical inconsistencies, historical inaccuracies, factual errors, or any other mistakes I may deliberately or inadvertently have committed.

I don`t think I have seen one response that has addressed anything I have stated so far in any of my posts on any board....]

2: harimau #403:

[...What is the big hurry, Farzana babe? Oh, you don`t like that familiar term, babe? That is only short for Babe In Total Control of Herself (B.I.T.C.H) as you called yourself just last Thursday in your column in the Afternoon D&C. So, do you prefer to be addressed as Babe or B.I.T.C.H?...]

3: harimau #417:

[....I was NOT calling Farzana any names. In the Bombay tabloid ``Afternoon D&C`` last Thursday, she revelled in calling herself a B.I.T.C.H. Check out www.afternoondc.com. There was even another article about what is a woman`s b.i.t.c.h. quotient based on her answers to a set of questions. Let Farzana dare to tell you that I am lying when I say this....]

4: Farzana Versey #429:

[...The article on the woman’s B quotient had nothing to do with my column; the paper probably found something they could tag onto my piece. Yes, I wrote a column called ‘The B.i.t.c.h.’. The acronym, Babe In Total Control Of Herself, was something that was forwarded to me, and I said so; the person had asked me to urge my women readers to smile when anyone called them a B.I.T.C.H. and say thank you. Not many of you will have access to the site or the time to do so, but let me clarify what I said after that. I quote: “I know it isn’t easy. I must also confess that although I have been called all manner of names, this one has eluded me, and I feel cheated, even before this definition came my way. What was I seeking through it? Control of myself? Does that help in the real world, where you have to control the rest? I admit that is not big in my scheme of things. But I do feel the need for release, often from imagined shackles.” End quote....]

5: harimau #432:

[...Quite the Artful Dodger, aren`t you, Farzana?..]
and finally this question for you in your own words... look deep within your self...and you don’t have to answer me ....I have figured it out already... this is rhetorical only....

6: harimau #395:

[.... you think you have any credibility left after these posts? ...]

Sadna # 443

Dont worry you are a phool too - a Ghobi ka phool though.

Farzana #429

Here is why I think you get a lot of responses which other writers donot. The premises of your assertions are often flawed and too easy to disprove(not that you often acknowledge it).

``I was told that since I was being nasty I must take it on the chin. I was nasty towards a group of fundamentalists in my country, and if they happen to belong to a certain religion, so be it. But, I have not hit out at people personally. ``

In the writeups you submited to chowk you spoke as if everyone in the majority community was an unexposed fundamentalist, even those of your colleagues whom you mentioned investigated discrimination against Muslims in housing. Thats a VERY nasty assumption I would think. From what I remember, even the chowk respondents to your nasty comments(who may or maynot think of themselves as Hindus) were given the `Hindu-sham-secularist` treatment irrespective of what they said.

``I am saying this because my tastes are rather expensive and with the khaki knicker level mentality and purse strings, I cannot be kept in fine fettle. Besides, how does anyone here know the comforts I am used to in Bombay? ``

I find it funny that you should deride shoestring budgets when you belong to a poor country India whihc is full of poor people. And which happens to be replete with examples of how a little has been made to go a long way because people just are so poor. An informed journalist is most likely to know this, in fact.

Check www.ashanet.org, btw, to see a difference made by some on shoestring budgets. The last I heard about an ASHA village project near Lucknow, a whole village full of people was making do with just 800 rupees worth of ordinary medicines and a visit from a homeopathic doctor every 2 weeks. Now either you dissociate yourself and deride everyone around for this state of affairs or you take ownership and try to become one of those who try to make a difference or at least buy in emotionally as someone feeling responsibility for his/her countrymen. Think about it, which is it?

Re the khaki-knicker-wallahs, for all the bad publicity they later earned, they were hard at work soon after the earthquake, camping out in shattered localities providing themselves with bare minimum personal facilities, helping earthquake victims and pulling out hundreds of dead bodies and giving them decent funerals after the Gujarat quake. If they are in for a bashing for their studiedly simple habits, you cannot overlook this.

I`d reached the conclusion that in common with what I suspect about Ms Bhosle, pre-journalism you led a sheltered life unsullied by contact with the unwashed (and those with POVs less West-centric(whatever that means) ) except on your own terms. Am I right or totally wrong? Many of us may be like that, but IMO we need feel a human connection with the things we choose to write about, especially in India which is a lot more than just what its well-to-do choose to make of it in their rarified surroundings.

Sadhana

COWARD IS AS COWARD DOES

Ms. Versey

You have chosen a path which is not easy to tread upon. It only shows your courage, confidence, and integrity. The more I know you, the more I am compelled to respect you. Off course, I do disagree with you on many things but that is what makes us human. And it has absolutely nothing to do anything with your writing about ugly Hindu underbelly as opposed to the Barbi World that they so relentlessly try to paint round the clock.

Character assasination is the weapon of a coward; a coward who avoids to look into the mirror not because he knows, but he does not have courage to see what the mirror is gonna show. So he assasinates his opponents` character to make him look as ugly as he is. But no matter how hard they try; no matter what name the call, a rose will always be a rose.

I tried hard but could not resist writing this:

Sachhai chup naihiN sakti banawat kay asooloon say
Khooshboo aa nahiN sakti Kaaghaz kay phooloooN say.

Never give in and Never give up.

More whining from Farzana. It is very instructive though...a consistent character trait. She whines about India in emotional ways and she`s done the same now about Chowk. I particularly like the part about how she`s ``forced`` to answer to her opinions on Chowk while other authors are ``allowed`` to get away without making any appearances. Now, dear child, would you tell us exactly who from Chowk showed up at your house and dragged you to the computer to answer questions?

Everything happens to Farzana because she`s Muslim...poor Farzana. It`s amazing perseverence on her part though that despite all the unfair treatment, she leads a lavish life in Bombay which the khaki shorts could never dream of matching.

Could the government of the ``greatest`` most ``secular`` country be corrupt and make it to the front page of CNN.com?

http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/south/03/15/naji.debrief/index.html

``Parliament was suspended for a third day as

opposition lawmakers called each other thieves,

and came close to blows outside the main gate.

The political turmoil canceled U.N. Secretary

General Kofi Annan`s visit to parliament. ``

http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/south/03/16/india.minister.02/index.html

Once a third world country, always a third world country. Why the hell are desis so corrupt?

Harimau, your last post to Farzana was powerfull stuff. When you can do it so eloquently, why call names? Ali1 do not call me hypocrite for that, I do not have any problem with siding with any Pakistanis who are reasonable (eg., Bilal, Sameer, Temporal, Hamidm, Tahmed, Godot, Sac, Rajanjua, Feroze,Fuzair, Fairdinkum, even Krashid, and many more, do not feel bad if I have left out, you all are very reasonable one point or other). But I have yet to see Farzana agree with any Indian with any issues, and I am really disappointed. Farzana, you also have to undertsand hindu views sometime, don`t you?

re. Assad_K #433:

You write: ``You could say that the history of Muhammad (PBUH) has been sanitized by his followers... but if he was the kind of man as has been claimed, would he be remembered by history as he is? Could you rewrite Attila or Chengiz Khan, or Vlad, as good guys for the world?``

Why do I get the feeling that, because I merely suggest that Muhammed was no Buddha, and that, like the best of men, could have had moments of weakness, I am perceived to be toeing the Islam-and-its-Prophet-are-Evil line? Why is it that, despite my repeatedly paying tribute to the man as a great revolutionary and social reformer (for his time), and despite my oft-voiced admiration for his progressive stance on education, the moment I suggest that he was not, in fact, perfection personified, I am deemed to be engaging in scurrilous slander.

--Maybe it is becasue of my non-Muslim identidy? There is nothing I have said that hamidm and SameerJB haven`t said, and in more colourfl language too. I suppose it is only `natural` that, the same coming from me, my motives will be deemed `ulterior`, and my objectiviety called into question. Not that I ever claimed `intellectual objectivity`. That is so tired and dispassionate a stance.

--Or maybe it is because, as you point out, I am not as quick to judge those who, do in fact, engage in such slander. I submit that those are completely different issues. Whether I choose to or choose not to sieze the opportunity to point out what seem to me logical and/or historical inconsistencies in Islam (as I assure you I`ve done with Christianity when discussing matters with Christians), I feel in no way obligated, by some extension, to lambaste the errant Hindu posters. Like I said, different matters. Besides, I do not blast Muslims. per se. And on the question of attcking beliefs, I stand by my earlier statement. There is too much that is sacred that ought not to be, and too much that should be that is not. I suspect that if beliefs were never attacked, we might as well be living in a fascist state.

It seems to me, as pointed out by sigalph some time ago, that whenever Muslims find their beliefs under attack, their preferred reaction is to cry ``bigot`` and thus claim the moral high ground; rather than provide a refutation.

As for my opinion on harimau, I still stand by my earlier statement... I have not seen in anything he has WRITTEN what I would call bigoted. Does he hate Muslims? Maybe. But his posts are limited to issues (often personal ones, but stil issues; not mere labelling and name-calling). Abrasive as he is, I have not once seen him label Muslims, in toto, ``pigs``, or equally ignorantly taunt them for, say, the clothes they wear.Might it be that what discomforts so many is that, horribly coarse as he is, he often makes a good points?

Between his outward disdain for general Muslim `bad attitude`, and say, krashid`s, Urstruly`s or Sarwari`s cool smugness on Hindu inferiority, I would have to say I respect him much more. I believe he has thrown a challenge your way. I would be interested to see you take it up. I suspect you will be called upon to think much deeper about waht he writes than you currently do.

re. my opinion on Rsaxena, you write: ``Throwing your support behind a person who does those things [attacks beliefs] makes you equally culpable.. though indeed I fail to see how the ‘occasional verse’ counts as harmless.``

If the quoting of a verses causes you harm, you really have to ask yourself who/what is causing that harm.

``Obviously your observations of Rsaxena being a non-attacking-people type are not ones that I share.. because I think that he does.``

Perhaps, but it doesn`t take a Freud to see the diference between playful taunts and venomous, or hate-filled forays.

`` Nor do I see how attacking beliefs is a much better option than attacking people..``

Here`s why I see it as a better option... by attacking beliefs, you are not necessarily passing moral judgement on those who subscribe to them. You might still see the other person as essentially the same as yourself, save for the `errant` belief.

If that still sounds self-righteous, well, let it never be said that I shied away from taking some absolutist positions. (Here`s where I have always seen eye-to-eye with Urstruly)

more later... It`s 3:45 am

rgds,

PM

Pankaj, Farzana

We can not wait for the entire government to be corruption free before we start giving our soldiers the best weapons they deserve, not the best weapons that came with suitcases full of cash.

We must award exemplary punishment to the guilty and make sure we wring corruption out of our defence establishment. For that, we don`t need socio-economic studies. Just a few bullets into some lucre-filled corrupt heads, Chinese style.

BTW there was a report that court-martialled officers stand a chance of being given death sentences. Good.